Advertisement

Virtual Tourism in a Game Environment: Untangling Judged Affordances and Sense of Place

Conference paper
  • 908 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 12211)

Abstract

The present study enriches and deepens understanding of the concepts of telepresence and sense of place, by examining their relevance to capture a place experience evoked in 3D environments through a research design that includes the affordance concept in virtual tourism. Many previous presence studies concern the in-the-moment experience without modeling the relationship with response variables that can help explain behavior in the digital or the material space. In this paper we tested affordance as the response variable in two different research models. The participants in our experiment explored the city of Los Angeles in a virtual environment (VE). Often, though not always, the participants had a feeling of “being there.” The results indicated that both concepts – telepresence and sense of place – can be used to measure the user experience in a VE. Telepresence appears to be a more reliable predictor than the alternative concept sense of place, but its meaning aspect is generally less well known, particularly with regard to a tourist’s intended activities and relevant affordances during a visit to a place.

Keywords

Virtual tourism Telepresence Sense of place Affordance 

References

  1. 1.
    Salmond, M., Salmond, J.: The gamer as tourist: the simulated environments and impossible geographies of videogames. In: Morpeth, N.D. (ed.). Tourism and the Creative Industries: Theories, Policies and Practice, pp. 151–163. Routledge, London and New York (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schwartz, L.: Fantasy, realism, and the other in recent video games. Space Cult. 9(3), 313–325 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Widyarto, S., Latiff, M.S.A.: The use of virtual tours for cognitive preparation of visitors: a case study for VHE. Facilities 25(7/8), 271–285 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dewailly, J.M.: Sustainable tourist space: from reality to virtual reality? Tourism Geogr. 1(1), 41–55 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lombard, M., Ditton, T.B., Weinstein, L.: Measuring telepresence: the validity of the temple presence inventory (TPI) in a gaming context. In: Fourteenth International Workshop on Presence (ISPR 2011), October, Edinburgh (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jonietz, D., Timpf, S.: On the relevance of Gibson’s affordances for geographical information science (GISc). Cogn. Process. 16(Suppl. 1), 265–269 (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lew, A.: Editorial: a place called tourism geographies. Tourism Geogr. 1, 1–2 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaltenborn, B.P.: Effects of sense of place on responses to environmental impacts—a study among residents in Svalbard in the Norwegian High Arctic. Appl. Geogr. 18(2), 169–189 (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tribe, J.: The indiscipline of tourism. Ann. Tourism Res. 24(3), 638–657 (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guttentag, D.: Virtual reality: applications and implications for tourism. Tourism Manag. 31(5), 637–651 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bauer, C., Jacobson, R.: Virtual travel: promoting tourism to unfamiliar sites through pre-trip experience. In: ENTER 1995: Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, pp. 17–21. Springer, Vienna (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Benjamin, I., Cooper, M.: Virtual tourism - a realistic assessment of virtual reality for the tourist industry. In: ENTER 1995: Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, pp. 135–143. Springer, Vienna (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cheong, R.: The virtual threat to travel and tourism. Tourism Manag. 16(6), 417–422 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Williams, P., Hobson, J.S.P.: Virtual reality and tourism: fact or fantasy? Tourism Manag. 16(6), 423–427 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fencott, C.: Content and creativity in virtual environments design. In: Proceedings of Virtual Systems and Multimedia 1999, pp. 308–317. University of Abertay Dundee, Dundee (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fencott, C., Ling, J., van Schaik, P., Shafiullah, M.: The effects of movement of attractors and pictorial content of rewards on users’ behaviour in virtual environments: an empirical study in the framework of perceptual opportunities. Interact. Comput. 15, 121–140 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Slater, M., Sanchez-Vives, M.: Enhancing our lives with immersive virtual reality. Front. Robot. AI 3, 74 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Acosta, A.F., et al.: Tourism marketing through virtual environment experience. In: Proceedings of the 2017 9th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers, pp. 262–267. ACM, December 2017Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tussyadiah, I.P., Wang, D., Jung, T.H., tom Dieck, M.C.: Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change: empirical evidence from tourism. Tourism Manag. 66, 140–154 (2018)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beck, J., Rainoldi, M., Egger, R.: Virtual reality in tourism: a state-of-the-art review. Tourism Rev. 74(3), 586–612 (2019)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miller, K.: The accidental carjack: ethnography, gameworld, tourism, and grand theft auto. Game Stud. 8(1), 147 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martin, P.: Space and place as expressive categories in videogames. Unpublished thesis, Brunel University (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schweizer, R.T.: Videogames cities in motions. Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    O’Neill, S.J., McCall, R., Smyth, M., Benyon, D.R.: Probing the sense of place. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual International Workshop Presence 2004, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Spain (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Smyth, M., Benyon, D.R., McCall, R., O’Neill, S.J., Carroll, F.: Patterns of place – a toolkit for the design and evaluation of real and virtual environments. In: Ijsselsteijn, W., Biocca, F., Freeman, J. (eds.) The Handbook of Presence. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Turner, P., Turner, S.: Place, sense of place, and presence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 15(2), 204–217 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Turner, P., Turner, S., Carroll, F.: The tourist gaze: towards contextualised virtual environments. In: Turner, P., Davenport, E. (eds.) Spaces, Spatiality and Technology, pp. 1–14. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hyun, M.Y., O’Keefe, R.M.: Virtual destination image: testing a telepresence model. J. Bus. Res. 65(1), 29–35 (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Codognet, P.: Artificial Nature and Natural Artifice. http://pauillac.inria.fr/~codognet/VR.html. Accessed 27 Jan 2020
  30. 30.
    Minsky, M.: Telepresence. Omni (June) 45–51 (1980)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bazin, A.: What is Cinema? (H. Gray, Trans.). University of California Press, Los Angeles (Original work published 1951) (1967)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Goffman, E.: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday, Anchor Books, New York (1959)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pourazad, M.T., Nasiopoulos, P., Ward, R.K.: Generating and depth map from the motion information of H.264-encoded 2D video sequence. EURASIP J. Image Video Process. 2010(1), 108584 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/108584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sutherland, I.E.: The ultimate display. In: Proceedings of International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) Congress 1965, New York, pp. 506–508, May 1965Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bolter, J.D.: Literary texts in an electronic age: scholarly implications and library services. In: Sutton, B. (ed.) Proceedings the Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, pp. 7–20, 10–12 April 1994Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fisher, S.S.: Recent developments in virtual experience design and production. In: Fisher, S.S., Bolas, M.T., Merritt, J.O. (eds.) Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Systems. Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 2409 (1995)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lee, K.M.: Presence, explicated. Commun. Theory 14(1), 27–50 (2004)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lombard, M., Ditton, T.B.: At the heart of it all: the concept of presence. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 3(2), JCMC321 (1997)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Ridder, H., Freeman, J., Avons, S.E.: Presence: concept, determinants and measurement. In: Proceedings of the SPIE, Human Vision and Electronic Imaging V, San Jose, CA, January 2000Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Loomis, J.M.: Distal attribution and presence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 1(1), 113–119 (1992)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Marsh, T., Wright, P., Smith, S.: Evaluation for the design of experience in virtual environments: modeling breakdown of interaction and illusion. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 4(2), 225–238 (2001)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sadowski, W.J., Stanney, K.M.: Measuring and managing presence in virtual environments. In: Stanney, K.M. (ed.) Handbook of Virtual Environments Technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2002)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schloerb, D.: A quantitative measure of telepresence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 4(1), 64–80 (1995)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sheridan, T.B.: Musing on telepresence and virtual presence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 1, 120–125 (1992)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sheridan, T.B.: Further musing on the psychophysics of presence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 5, 241–246 (1996)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Baños, R.M., Botella, C., Perpiña, C.: Virtual reality and psychopathology. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 2(4), 283–292 (1999)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mantovani, G., Riva, G.: “Real” presence: how different ontologies generate different criteria for presence, telepresence, and virtual presence. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 8(5), 538–548 (1999)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Riva, G., Davide, F., IJsselsteijn, W.A. (eds.) Being There: Concepts, Effects and Measurements of User Presence in Synthetic Environments. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Schubert, T., Friedmann, F., Regenbrecht, H.: The experience of presence: factor analytic insights. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 10, 266–281 (2001)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Spagnolli, A., Gamberini, L.: Immersion/emersion: presence in hybrid environments. Paper presented at the Presence 2002: Fifth Annual International Workshop, Porto, Portugal, 9–11 October 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Waterworth, J.A., Waterworth, E.L.: Focus, locus, and sensus: the three dimensions of virtual experience. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 4(2), 203–213 (2001)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Waterworth, J.A., Waterworth, E.L.: The meaning of presence. Presence-Connect 3(2) (2003)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zahoric, P., Jenison, R.L.: Presence as being-in-the-world. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 7(1), 78–89 (1998)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Riva, G., Waterworth, J.A., Waterworth, W.L., Mantovani, F.: From intention to action: the role of presence. New Ideas Psychol. 29, 24–37 (2011)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Waterworth, J.A., Waterworth, E.L., Riva, G., Mantovani, F.: Presence: form, content and consciousness. In: Lombard, M., Biocca, F., Freeman, J., IJsselsteijn, W., Schaevitz, R.J. (eds.) Immersed in Media, pp. 35–58. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Baños, R.M., Botella, C., Guerrero, B., Liaño, V., Alcañiz, M., Rey, B.: The third pole of the sense of presence: comparing virtual and imagery spaces. PsychNology 3(1), 90–100 (2005)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Shamai, S.: Sense of place: an empirical measurement. Geoforum 22, 347–358 (1991)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Biocca, F.: The cyborg’s dilemma: progressive embodiment in virtual environments. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 3(2), JCMC324 (1997)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Biocca, F.: Inserting the presence of mind into a philosophy of presence: a response to Sheridan and Mantovani and Riva. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 10(5) 546–556 (2001)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Mennecke, B.E., Triplett, J.L., Hassall, L.M., Conde, Z.J.: Embodied social presence theory. In: 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, pp. 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Merleau-Ponty, M.: Phenomenology of Perception (trans. C. Smith). Routledge, New York (Original work published in 1945) (1962)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gibson, J.J.: The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1979)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Norman, D.A.: Affordances, conventions, and design. Interactions 6(3), 38–41 (1999)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hartson, H.R.: Cognitive, physical, sensory and functional affordances in interaction design. Behav. Inf. Technol. 22(5), 315–338 (2003)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Scarantino, A.: Affordances explained. Philos. Sci. 70, 949–961 (2003)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Gaver, W.W.: Technology affordances. In: Robertson, S.P., Olson, G.M., Olson, J.S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 91, Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, 28 April–5 June 1991, pp. 79–84 (1991)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Flach, J.M., Holden, J.G.: The reality of experience. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 7, 90–95 (1998)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    McKee, R.: Storytelling that moves people; a conversation with screenwriting coach. Harvard Bus. Rev. 80, 51–55 (2003)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Woodside, A.G., Megehee, C.M.: Advancing consumer behavior theory in tourism via visual narrative art. Int. J. Tourism 12(5), 418–431 (2010)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Weick, K.E.: Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1995)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Woodside, A.G., Cruickshank, B.F., Dehuang, N.: Stories visitors tell about Italian cities as destination icons. Tourism Manag. 28(1), 162–174 (2007)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Nunez, D.: A capacity limited, cognitive constructionist model of virtual presence. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Cape Town, South Africa (2007)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Tjostheim, I., Go, F.M.: Sense of place in a virtual environment. Edward Relph’s place theory, vicarious and behavioral outsideness. In: Proceedings TTRA Europe, Rotterdam-Breda, 22–23 April 2009, pp. 337–351 (2009)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tjostheim, I., Go, F.M.: Place marketing and experience of place in a virtual environment. In: Go, F., Govers, R. (eds.) International Place Branding Yearbook 2011. Managing Reputational Risk. Palgrave Macmillan (2012)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18(1), 39–50 (1981)Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Barclay, D.C., Higgins, C., Thompson, R.: The partial least squares approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technol. Stud. 2(2), 285–308 (1995)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    White, J.C., Varadarajan, P.R., Dacin, P.A.: Market situation interpretation and response: the role of cognitive style, organizational culture, and information use. J. Mark. 67(3), 63–79 (2003)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Fornell, C., Bookstein, F.L.: Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. J. Mark. 19, 440–452 (1982)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L., Newsted, P.R.: A partial least squares latent variables modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a monte carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf. Syst. Res. 14(2), 189–217 (2003)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y.: On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 16(1), 74–94 (1988)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gefen, D., Straub, D.: A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: tutorial and annotated example. Commun. AIS 16(5), 91–109 (2005)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Chin, W.W.: The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In: Marcoulides, G.A. (ed.) Modern Methods for Business Research, pp. 295–358. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1998)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Relph, E.: Spirit of place and sense of place in virtual realities. Res. Philos. Technol. Special Issue: Real and Virtual Places, Techne 10(3), 17–24 (2007)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Benyon, D., Smyth, M., O’Neill, S., McCall, R., Carroll, F.: The place probe: exploring a sense of place in real and virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 15(6), 668–687 (2006)Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Slater, M.: Measuring presence: a response to the Witmer and Singer Presence Questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 8(5), 560–565 (1999)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Etzioni, A., Etzioni, O.: Face-to-face and computer-mediated communities. A comparative analysis. Inf. Soc. 15(4), 241–248 (1999)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Chalmers, D.J.: The virtual and the real. Disputatio 9, 309–352 (2017)Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Yung, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C.: New realities: a systematic literature review on virtual reality and augmented reality in tourism research. Current Issues Tourism 22, 1–26 (2017)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ryan, C.: Ways of conceptualizing the tourist experience. A review of literature. Tourism Recreat. Res. 35(1), 37–46 (2010)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gottlieb, A.: American’s vacations. Ann. Tourism Res. 9, 165–187 (1982)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian Computing CenterOsloNorway
  2. 2.Umeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations